The Grand Rapids City Commission was to consider Tuesday a new ordinance requiring single-family rentals to undergo the same inspections now required of multi-family units. City officials have worked on the issue with housing advocates and landlords for more than a year in hopes of reaching a compromise acceptable to both sides.

Officials held a public hearing on the issue last month, which drew about 300 people. Commissioners at their meeting two weeks ago expressed concerns about whether the proposed ordinance change would accomplish what is intended. Officials hope requiring the added inspections will better maintain the city’s housing stock, provide safer housing for renters and rid some neighborhoods of blight, which has blossomed since the housing crunch prompted some 3,200 homes to be converted into rental properties between 2006 and 2009.

While housing advocates say they’re generally pleased with the compromise — which among other things would require more frequent certifications of rental units — the Grand Rapids Rental Property Owners Association said it can’t accept what it believes is a plan doomed to fail and create “wasteful government spending.”

The original ordinance allowed landlords to have their properties certified by the city once every six years, but the compromise reached late last week allows for two, four and six-year certifications. That’s what upset property owners association President Tom Koetsier the most.

“We’re shocked to see the two, four and six-year certification,” Koetsier said. “The RPOA will not support the new change without the retention of the six=year certification because everything we talked about was based on that.

“Inspecting each and every house will not accomplish what they want,” he added. “They have a complaint-based system that already accomplishes what they want and now they’re going to spend a whole lot of time inspecting a lot of houses that don’t need to be inspected. It’s wasteful government spending.”

Those favoring the new inspections say many tenants are afraid to report their landlords for fear of retaliation, leaving many properties in disrepair. They note there are some 4,000 foreclosed homes sitting vacant in the city.

Housing advocates like Paul Haan, executive director of the Healthy Homes coalition, said the proposed compromise maintains his group’s original goals. Healthy Homes was among the groups that worked more than a year on the issue and reported to the City Commission last year.

“It seems to be hitting on many of the things that we recommended,” Haan said. “At the end of the day, we want what’s going to be most effective for the health of children and this seems to hit the essential points.”

Grand Rapids City Manager Greg Sundstrom said along with the more frequent certifications, the proposed ordinance would now eliminate a registration fee but increase inspection fees to draw the same amount of revenue needed to help pay for the program.

Sundstrom added that the city will also ask the RPOA to provide training for its members and try to create a fund landlords could use to bring their properties up to code, possibly by using some $700,000 of money set aside for the city’s rental rehabilitation program. Officials would also set up a citizens’ committee to monitor whether the new inspection and certification processes are accomplishing what’s desired, and see if landlords would agree to receive communications regarding housing violations via email to save the city money.

The city at some future date would also adopt the International Property Maintenance Code used by many surrounding communities, so landlords wouldn’t have as many different sets of regulations with which to comply. That all that sounds like housekeeping to Koetsier, whose members would face more frequent scrutiny by city inspectors.

“We’re under that now with multi-family units and that’s fine when you have people living in close proximity and there are common areas and what people do in one apartment affects everyone else,” Koetsier said. “But when you’re in a single-family home, it’s just you and your family living in that house so how you choose to live in that house doesn’t affect anybody else.”